Sen. Lisa Murkowski has introduced a bill that aims to open up jobs to locals at certain Southeast mines.
Sen. Murkowski announced Wednesday that she had introduced new legislation to allow for 18 miles of road through a roadless area on Prince of Wales to the Niblack and Bokan Mountain heavy metal mines. The legislation is expected to be similar to Senate Bill S. 3330 Murkowski introduce in June of 2012 called the Niblack Mining Area Road Authorization Act.
Niblack mine is located near the Niblack Anchorage on Prince of Wales Island, 30 miles southwest of Ketchikan. It is a copper, zinc, gold and silver prospect.
Bokan Mountain, owned by Ucore Rare Metals, is a retired Uranium mine on the southern end of Prince of Wales Island between the South Arm of Moira Sound and the West Arm of Kendrick Bay. The 19-square-mile project is being prospected for heavy rare earth elements.
Rare earth metals are used in advanced technology and renewable energy technology such as electric cars, wind turbines and liquid crystal display televisions.
The timing of the bill comes as both mines finish economic feasibility studies and decide whether to proceed with development, a Murkowski spokesperson said in an email interview. Moving forward would kick off an 18-month environmental impact statement process followed by a one- to two-year construction process, he said.
“The mines could open within four years,” the spokesperson said.
The project calls for 26 miles of road to the Niblack Mine - 18 miles of which would be through roadless area. Another 50 miles of road would be punched to the Bokan Mountain mineral deposits.
“Without this legislation, workers would likely have to travel to Ketchikan and then take a boat across often dangerous waters to the reach the mine sites,” According to a recent Murkowski press release.
Murkowski said opening up access to the mines by road would allow local mine workers to commute home daily.
“It is vital that the mines know if they can hire local Prince of Wales Island residents before they prepare to open,” the spokesperson said. “Otherwise they likely will solely hire Ketchikan-based workers.”
The unemployment rate in Craig, Klawock and Hydaburg is higher than in Ketchikan
“So it would make sense that … residents have a chance to safely get to jobs at the mines,” Murkowski’s spokesperson said. “Rather than being required to make it to Ketchikan in order to be able to take a day boat back to the mines for work.”
Mike Satre, Executive Director of the Council of Alaska Producers, said he agreed the roads would give the advantage of incentivizing local hire.
Roads would allow “POW residents a simple commute to work rather than relying solely on boat access and on-site camp facilities,” Satre said. “Hiring and retaining a local work force is much easier when workers can be home after every shift,” Satre said.
Bob Claus, outreach coordinator with the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, said Murkowski’s legislation was unnecessary as road building to these mines is “already provided for as an exception.”
Murkowski is also getting ahead of the mines, Claus said.
“The mines are not permitted yet, much less up and running,” Claus said. “There is considerable speculation about when or if these projects might come into production.”
Claus also said marine access to the mines is more efficient and would not be subject to closure in the winter months.
“…similar roads on Prince of Wales Island close for four or five months of the year due to snow load and a lack of maintenance funding,” Claus said.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (29)
Add commentWho pays?
I'm OK with a road being built to the mines, but should the public be on the hook to build it? Wouldn't that be a cost of doing business, just like running a ferry from Ketchikan would be?
At a minimum, the mines should be chipping in the amount of money their crew ferry operation would cost, with the public picking up the difference. Maybe build a public road, but the mines pay for maintenance. Otherwise this would just be corporate welfare.
good move
Regardless of who pays for the road, its a good move to get some of these mines up and running. It provides real living wage jobs and supplies the US with precious metals we need. This is so much better than entitlements and giveaways.
Can you say
Roads to Resources?
Always the first choice!
Roads should be built anywhere feaseable, as soon as that is determined. They are always the best choice.
Next?
A federal road to the resources up the east side of Lynn Canal! Infrastructure!
Mines must pay Royalties on public resources
The boats work just fine in these waters...ask Parnell.
No road building in the road less areas
Lisa this is SE Ak ..here Alaskans use the "marine hwy"...its the Alaskan way. You have been in DC toooooooo long.
Roads to resources?
These are the public’s resources. Yes, things have to change & this bill should not move forward until they do.
The mining industry is not paying royalties on our minerals. The mining industry is STILL operating under the old 1872 law when Ulysses Grant was Pres. US tax payers don't even get a penny from mining operating on public lands....what they get is land ruined from mine tailings, blasting, other waste....
Its been estimated that because of the 1872 law - lost revenue to Americans/ federal Gov. is well over $245 billion.
Roads?
Build them.
Roads burn less fuel than marine transport.
Roads cost to build and I bet
Roads cost to build and I bet Lisa will put that on the back of tax payers. No Deal.
@ snagger - "federal road
@ snagger - "federal road to the resources"
Tax payers should not be on the hook for this, industry pays.
@ bandit - "This is so much better than entitlements and giveaways"
Handing our minerals over to the mining industry is a giveaway. Oh, I get it you think THEY are "entitled".
@wavmkr
Sailing ships use almost no fuel. If fuel is the metric maybe they should sail to and from the mine?
El_Boorba....
O.K.
Let's,also, replace the AMHS ferries with sailing ships. They'll work great in Lynn Canal.
conservates and spending
Typical of Murkowski: have the government pay for a road for a private mine using some job creation reasoning. Now this is the same Murkowsk1 who has been against anything Obama tries to do for job creation. She is among the first to cry how Obama should not use federal moneys to create jobs. So why should she be promoting this project with tax dollars.
There are many way the road could be built using creative funding. It could be build with corporation funds but hey that's expecting to much isn't it.
There are cheaper ways to create good jobs
Hmm, 18 miles road will cost, in that mountainous terrain, somewhere from $2 to $4 million per mile. And how many local jobs on Prince of Wales are we going to create for that. No wonder the feds are deep in hock! I'd say that reasoning is a lame attempt to rationalize a little pork barrel for the mining companies and try to suck the unions into supporting this special interest favor. Instead, how about the feds quit slashing basic salmon research and support the thousands of fishermen in Alaska who don't require roads to go to work every day?
Juneau tax revenue
The two largest tax payers in Juneau are the two mines. If Juneau does not like mines then close them and pay more to live in Juneau out of your own pocket. The two mines supported by LM's bill will produce significant tax revenue and more then cover the cost of the roads.
Sounds good in theory,
Sounds good in theory, taxman, though US history is replete with enormous environmental burdens left to the taxpayers when mines have taken the booty and moved on, leaving only toxic waste behind. In any case, if the proceeds from the mine are projected to be sufficient to cover the cost of the roads, then the corporations can certainly make it part of the development plan to pay for them up front. If it's truly a good business plan, investors will put up the money for development costs -- that how our capital markets work to raise money for new ventures. Vague promises about how tax revenues are going to make everything peachy in the long run just open the door to rampant and corrupt corporate welfare. We need to have incentives and discipline in place for corporations as well as individuals in our economy.
Many businesses pay big taxes
Many businesses pay big taxes in Juneau ..Costco, Home Depo...
Mining is boom and bust economy. The last thing we need to do is spend and build like this resource has no end. What happens when people leave town when the mines close?
We lose our shirts.
Taxman: Mines would pay
Taxman:
Mines would pay taxes? are you sure? I don't think so. POW is not in a borough.
Small workforce to choose from
“It is vital that the mines know if they can hire local Prince of Wales Island residents before they prepare to open,” the spokesperson said. “Otherwise they likely will solely hire Ketchikan-based workers.”
How many qualified workers are they going to find on that island that justifies a road? They'll have to ferry in workers anyway.
I would not call a life of
I would not call a life of work underground a good job.
Alaskans deserve better jobs for their kids.
CBJ needs to trim some projects out and stop lumping projects together on our ballots. Projects put before the public need to be voted on individually so they stand on their own merits.
Lets see an ordinance address this.
Mining road through Cholmondeley Sound pristine salmon habitat
When I moved to Juneau a decade ago, I caught alot of flak from the general public for trying to be both pro-fish and pro-mining. I represent commercial fishermen who believe that large mining operations and commercial fishing can co-exist in SE Alaska.
Indeed, look at Green's Creek Mine. The large mine, in Hawk Inlet, is right next door to some of the most productive pink salmon systems in the world.
But it's not right on top of them and it doesn't have a road over, next to, or through the salmon spawning systems.
And look at Kensington. Supported by seiners, gillnetters and trollers, it is right smack dab in the middle of some of the best salmon habitat in central, lower Lynn Canal and yet does not disturb commercial fisheries or salmon habitat.
This new mining operation on POW would have a road that runs through Disappearance Creek and next to and over the top of the largest wild chum salmon system in SE Alaska.
This is unacceptable.
SEAS has not commented on the Niblack or Bokan Mt. projects, even though Bokan Mt. is right on top of one of our most successful release sites of enhanced chums salmon in Kendrick Bay.
I guess we're missing the boat here. This is purely unacceptable. We don't sit around and throw rocks all day at the miners nor at Senator Murkowski like we could. We believe it is our job to be observant, participatory members of the economic and environmental community.
So we will be weighing in.
On behalf of the 315 seiners, 1600 crew and skipper jobs and 3-4000 direct and indirect shipping and processing jobs in SE, I must say, as Executive Director of SEAS, that this approach doesn't look good so far. We sincerely hope that there will be discussion with fishing industry reps in order to come together and work as we have done with prior successful mining operations such as Greens Creek and Kensington, which we consider to be great, balanced approaches to mining that complement, rather than denigrate, commercial fishing in SE Alaska.
Sincerely
Robert M. Thorstenson, Jr.
SEAS Executive Director
410 Calhoun Ave
Must be Genetic
Her dad wanted to build a road for Kensington so they wouldn't have to use a boat.
What's next? A bridge for Greenscreek?
Our ocean is the best highway there is and it doesn't need construction or plowing.
Guess what...
Salmon for.... You don't speak for all those folks you claim. You may speak for some of your members. Claiming to be the voice of 6000 is simply false. Are your claims about impacts to salmon also false? Hummm.......
Ucore
There are other outstanding questions as well which make this effort questionable: it is not difficult to find articles suggesting Ucore's press releases on the potential of the Bokan mine for REE are misleading. Seems a far wiser course would be to aid road-building after economic viability is adequately proven and commitments are in place.
This does not address the environmental concerns, which would also be quite large.
good questions
I think everyone is bringing up great questions. The reporter did a good job on this article. However, I think that all of these questions in the comments show that more in-depth reporting could be done ------ at the very least, a several good follow-up articles should be done.
Road Building
I see a bunch of folks complaining pretty loudly about the government footing the bill for the construction of the roads, but cannot see anywhere in the article that indicates that the Fed's would be doing anything but allowing for the construction of them. Could it be that the legislation is intended to let the mining companies acquire permits to construct and maintain the roads through those areas while complying with said permits for the duration of the life of mine? Just thought I'd throw that out there.
99% of the rare earth minerals
are controlled by China. Extracting rare earth elements so our satellites work, beloved I phones, blackberrys, tablets and Apple Ipads work, missile defense systems work, electric vehicles work...you get the point. Should be a Department of Defense paid for road? you decide.
http://www.csl.army.mil/usacsl/publications/IP7_11.pdf
The POW roads will allow POW citizens to work at the mines and even allow ore concentrate to occur on POW because with a road will come electrical transmission lines. Otherwise these ore processing jobs will likely go to Prince Rupert and our US 1% of rare earth minerals will be controlled by Canada. How nice, Ayh?
Roads do not kill salmon. Poorly engineered and improperly planned roads kill salmon. Roads and salmon degradation and not mutually inclusive.
Lands
If you look at a map of Alaska lands you will see that most of S.E. is federal lands. To build a road on federal lands takes legislation. Hence the reason Murkowski is introducing legislation. This is nothing new or outlandish.
I'M A Road Supporter if it's right---
The road could be a great asset, Prince of Wales residents will see that it is thoroughly vetted before it moves forward.
POW-
And, the road project was forwarded by POW residents "not" the mines they had nothing to do with it---